No description available.

The intention of campaign finance regulations was to reduce the influence of special interest groups while increasing citizen contributions. Critics have suggested an unintentional consequence of this policy of increasing bias in campaign contributions in favor of incumbents. These claims of intentional and unintentional consequences, however, have rarely been tested. My dissertation examines the intentional and unintentional consequences of campaign finance regulations in the American states. This study adopts a theoretical framework emphasizing the different effects of regulations on two distinctive types of contributors. A particularistic contributor, whose motivation is influencing policy, is likely to be affected by contribution limits. A universalistic contributor, motivated by helping his or her favorite candidates, is not likely to respond to regulations. Furthermore, the disparity of contributions is not expected to be affected by contribution limits. Two specific hypotheses reflecting the theoretical consideration are tested: 1) Restrictive contribution limits reduce the number and amount of particularistic contributions and increase the disparity between the numbers as well as the amounts of contributions, and 2) Contribution limits do not affect the number, the amount, or the disparities of universalistic contributions. Individual contribution records on gubernatorial elections are collected from 1990 to 2000 in 42 states. After aggregating individual contribution records by state and candidate, two analyses are conducted at the state and candidate level. The results indicate that campaign finance regulations work without the unintentional consequence of providing a financial advantage to incumbents at both the state and candidate levels. Contribution limits increase the number of total contributors, reduce the number and amount of particularistic contributions, and increase the number of universalistic contributors. In addition, further analyses show a dynamic effect of contribution limits on corporations, labor unions, individuals, parties, and ideology PACs. Restrictive contribution limits reduce the number and amount of corporate contributions, but only reduce the amount of labor union contributions. On the other hand, strict contribution limits encourage individual contributions, but discourage party and ideological PAC contributions. The intentional consequence of campaign finance regulations does not result in the unintentional consequence of increasing bias in favor of incumbents. These findings suggest that current regulations that limit campaign contributions should remain in place.

Nowadays social networks have millions or some even billions of users who spend most of their free time there. Therefore there is no surprise that the potential impact on society becomes part of many experts research. According to some authors, social networks offer an opportunity for political participation especially for those who generally do not participate. Even politicians start to use these networks to mobilize voters. We can observe this new trend in the first direct presidential elections in the Czech Republic 2013, when some of the candidates tried to reach and mobilize voters through social networks. During presidential campaign 2012/2013, users could have participated in various political activities which enabled sharing political views. The aim of this paper is to determine the impact of using social networks during presidential elections, particularly using of Facebook, on interest in politics between users 18- 35 years. The diploma thesis focuses on the impact of Facebook because it is the most popular and used social network in the Czech Republic and also due to the fact that some experts argue that this social network played an important role in the presidential campaign. This paper will be based on quantitative research in form of a questionnaire survey, which was created on the...